Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fwd: Re: A.'.A.'

Expand Messages
  • Jason Carpenter
    The A. .A. . is an organization whose membership for some reason believes that they must keep such a secret, which is in direct violation of the letters of
    Message 1 of 19 , Nov 14, 2001
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      The A.'.A.'. is an organization whose membership for some reason
      believes that they must keep such a secret, which is in direct
      violation of the letters of their Oaths. If any of the current
      leadership of the A.'.A>'. is to be taken as an example of the kinds
      of Adepts that the A.'.A.'. produces, it is indeed a failed system of
      initiation because the leaders have failed in fulfilling in the
      letter of their Oaths that they claim to hold so sacred.

      The work of the A.'.A.'. is based on the the concept of Scientific
      Illuminism and that "Mystery is the Enemy of Truth". In Theory it is
      probably the most profound and simple systems of attainment possible,
      being based on the idea that the Sepheroth can be used as guides to
      greater and greater levels of consciousness. Working in the strictest
      sense of A.'.A.'. accomplishment though, most human being can never
      make it beyond Neophyte or Zelator lacking the discipline necessary
      to master the subtle aspects of the body required for the advanced
      work beyond the Zelator degree. Call it A.D.D. or what you will, I
      call it the curse of the human race in this modern age, LAZINESS. I
      suffer from this disease as well. The greatest tragedy is that those
      who do possess the discipline to step beyond these bounds often stop
      th necessary Yoga work required by the A.'.A.'. after passing the
      initial test and fail to accomplish any work of note. A disciplined
      body is a disciplined mind. I also apply this same criticism to
      myself.

      The A.'.A.'. is subject to a lot of infighting based on it's degree
      system and the misunderstanding that many people have of how it works
      and what it means. There are many masters and no pupils in the realm
      of A.'.A.'. claims and it is borderline insanity. I sometimes call
      the A.'.A.'. the Ancient Asylum. There seems to be a lack of any
      groundwork in many of the socalled "Master of the temple" wannabes. I
      used to respect some of these people for having the balls to assume
      the grade but have learned to see it as yet another form of Laziness
      and lack of accomplishment. Wanna get a few quick students, call
      yourself Frater K.R. A MASTER OF THE TEMPLE in really big letters and
      see how many you can fool into thinking you really are. Maybe you can
      use it to rebuild your master's (who demoted you) former Order. Of
      course there are a few exceptions that can be found in the world,
      somewhere... I hope... maybe. BIG MAYBE.

      Of course the O.T.O. is above such criticism and is not open to any
      interpretation whatsoever and should you do such you are either a
      liar or have no idea what you are talking about and should just shut
      up altogether.

      Someone once said that the people in the know don't talk about it. I
      say that the people in the know don't talk about it because they
      don't want to deal with all those people not in the know who will
      laugh in their faces and say they are wrong.

      So in Thelema we live on a "don't ask, don't tell" policy because if
      you tell the truth you will be ridiculed and if you open your mouth
      and have no idea what you are talking about you will be ridiculed.
      Wow, makes a lot sense to me.

      Love is the law, love under will.

      Frater Fuckaduck
    • Robert Furtkamp
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. ... Oh, they often talk about it. You just have to know how to listen. ... The truth is so simple you won t
      Message 2 of 19 , Nov 14, 2001
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

        On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Jason Carpenter wrote:

        > Someone once said that the people in the know don't talk about it. I
        > say that the people in the know don't talk about it because they
        > don't want to deal with all those people not in the know who will
        > laugh in their faces and say they are wrong.

        Oh, they often talk about it. You just have to know how to listen.

        > So in Thelema we live on a "don't ask, don't tell" policy because if
        > you tell the truth you will be ridiculed and if you open your mouth
        > and have no idea what you are talking about you will be ridiculed.

        The 'truth' is so simple you won't believe it.

        Love is the Law, Love under Will.
        ==
        reverendrob.com .`. luciferchrist.com .`. realm-of-shade.com

        "There is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing
        to be unclean, to him it is unclean." - Romans 14:14
      • Kevin Tom
        ... From: cameron [mailto:cbailes@home.com] Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 12:17 AM To: thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [t93] Fwd: Re: A. .A. Do
        Message 3 of 19 , Nov 14, 2001
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          -----Original Message-----
          From: cameron [mailto:cbailes@...]
          Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 12:17 AM
          To: thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [t93] Fwd: Re: A.'.A.'

          Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law,

          > The 'truth' is so simple you won't believe it.

          On the other hand, the illusion deceives everyone, it isn't just a sodom
          apple, it's Dirty Sanchez himself.


          LOL! Too funny. That says it all.


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • cameron
          Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law, ... On the other hand, the illusion deceives everyone, it isn t just a sodom apple, it s Dirty Sanchez
          Message 4 of 19 , Nov 15, 2001
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law,

            > The 'truth' is so simple you won't believe it.

            On the other hand, the illusion deceives everyone, it isn't just a sodom
            apple, it's Dirty Sanchez himself.


            Love is the law, love under will,
            Cameron
          • John Bonanno
            Care Circulus, The Silver Star has eleven rays. Five whirl in the opposite direction of the other six. The axis has an ever changing orientation. This
            Message 5 of 19 , Nov 15, 2001
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Care Circulus,

              The Silver Star has eleven rays. Five whirl in the opposite
              direction of the other six. The axis has an ever changing
              orientation. This allows the star to witness its course in all
              directions on all planes. It has encompassed the source, impossibly,
              in a point.

              Agape Aiwass Thelema
              JB

              Fra. Absolutus
            • 333
              50011115 VI om Teitan /Jason Carpenter again makes ridiculous generalized assertions about the A. . A. . as if there is only one way to interpret this
              Message 6 of 19 , Nov 15, 2001
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                50011115 VI om

                Teitan<###>/Jason Carpenter again makes ridiculous generalized assertions
                about "the A.'. A.'." as if there is only one way to interpret this phrase
                or the beings associated with it. largely he is talking about human social
                lineages here (associated with Crowley/VVVVV, George Cecil Jones/DDS, not
                transcendental wisdom manifest through the aura of the adepts and conferred
                through informal, individual, initiations.

                I will be contrasting my own preferred notion of the AA, though unlike
                Jason I will not pretend that his Lesser AA does not exist, or fail to
                address it, as he has done several times in addressing questions about
                it in T93-l. perhaps this is because he knows no more than the social
                group. if the latter is not the case, perhaps he'll say more.

                "Jason Carpenter" <teitan111@...>:
                > The A.'.A.'. is an organization whose membership for some reason
                > believes that they must keep such a secret, which is in direct
                > violation of the letters of their Oaths.

                the AA's membership does not have a coherent position on anything of
                which I have been able to determine. neither do all members of the AA
                (however called) believe that they must keep it a secret, nor do they all
                believe that they have "Oaths" or even that there is such a thing as
                "membership" per se (as compared to a networked association).

                > If any of the current
                > leadership of the A.'.A>'. is to be taken as an example of the kinds
                > of Adepts that the A.'.A.'. produces, it is indeed a failed system of
                > initiation because the leaders have failed in fulfilling in the
                > letter of their Oaths that they claim to hold so sacred.

                then perhaps you're looking at the wrong "A.'.A.'." leaders. the AA that
                I know has no leadership of which I am aware. all members are acquainted
                only with their immediate initiator, and, if they somehow find it of
                value, those whom any particular individual may themselves initiate. this
                is different than an "initiatic organization" (like (c)OTO) which uses
                ceremonies and initiations for membership criteria (the AA does not do
                this, as I know it).

                > The work of the A.'.A.'. is based on the the concept of Scientific
                > Illuminism and that "Mystery is the Enemy of Truth".

                I was unaware of this principle or concept. my impression is that mystery
                is an important part of mystical life, and that its dimensions conforms
                rather negatively to the control which the aspirant may wish to level upon
                the world at large. mystery is a spice for the mystic, and Scientific
                Illuminism, as practiced by the bulk of humans, is truly neither scientific
                nor illuminating -- in fact it too often becomes religious and dogmatic.

                > In Theory it is
                > probably the most profound and simple systems of attainment possible,
                > being based on the idea that the Sepheroth can be used as guides to
                > greater and greater levels of consciousness.

                this may hold within the group(s) started by VVVVV (Crowley) and DDS
                (GCJones), but as a whole, the Great White Brotherhood doesn't seem to
                require Jewish, Gnostic, stolen, invented, traditional, or particular
                mystical tools for the connection to the Current and self-initiation.

                some apparently favour Hermetic pseudo-Jewish numerolinguistics and
                some Lurianic ideas about the cosmos, but at best this is a subset of
                the AA as a whole (as the GWB, which Crowley indicated he was describing
                in the publication "One Star in Sight").

                > Working in the strictest
                > sense of A.'.A.'. accomplishment though, most human being can never
                > make it beyond Neophyte or Zelator lacking the discipline necessary
                > to master the subtle aspects of the body required for the advanced
                > work beyond the Zelator degree.

                my impression is that so much confusion surrounds the Body of the Divine
                (or whatever you'd like to call it), that charlatans are able to create
                fabricated social lineages and call them by a recognized name of the
                Celestial Masters (Secret Chiefs, Tibetan Masters, etc.) but without any
                conferment of consciousness-development. that is, people *imagine* that
                they "attain" or "accomplish" and have no scientific background from
                which to discern actual progress. ego-inflation or personality-cults are
                the typical result, with much ado made about what specific individuals
                have created (noticed the focus on the AC/GCJ "A.'.A.'." rather than to
                expand the discussion to the way that the GWB as a whole actually works).

                > Call it A.D.D. or what you will, I
                > call it the curse of the human race in this modern age, LAZINESS.

                that's your Protestant Work Ethic showing. laziness (as in the course of
                a river, or the wu-wei of Taoism) is too often UNDERstudied. aspirants
                to Hermetic systems typically want to do much more than they are able
                and with insufficient studies to make heads or tails out of what would
                be practically advantageous for them to pursue. when a newbie goes to a
                "Thelemic" forum and asks how they should proceed, typically they are
                given some pat standard book, org, or ritual, and told to engage it,
                but without any real consideration of the character and nature of the
                person who is asking, what they should be finding, or toward what any of
                these ought to lead ("I say they're Thelemic, so they are, dammit!").

                > ...those
                > who do possess the discipline to step beyond these bounds often stop
                > th necessary Yoga work required by the A.'.A.'. after passing the
                > initial test and fail to accomplish any work of note.

                unfortunately too many cannot see the trees of actual accomplishment
                for the forest of "adepti" who have gone before them and recommended
                their patented method of "progress". where are the Thelemites who start
                questioning the *reality* of progress? discern between self-delusion as
                a pitfall and something that actually produces self-transformation?

                ultimately those who create these systems don't seem to care much for
                the condition or course of the newbie that comes after them. they are
                more interested in emphasizing their position with respect to an org,
                their authority so as to better be able to convince, and their wisdom
                and power so as to inspire a cult in their wake (e.g. Crowleyanity).

                > A disciplined body is a disciplined mind. I also apply this same
                > criticism to myself.

                the two are worthy of separate and comparable disciplines, related in
                character to the medium of the operand. bodily disciplines work on
                muscles, mental disciplines work on synapses, mystical disciplines work
                on the spirit.

                > The A.'.A.'. is subject to a lot of infighting based on it's degree
                > system and the misunderstanding that many people have of how it works
                > and what it means.

                we agree! not just "infighting". it's a struggle for appearance and for
                position. any struggle associated with the A.'.A.'. must be founded on
                bogus principles, from what I can see. if you see someone struggling
                for authority, competing with others, etc., you can pretty well assume
                that hey have no real connection to the Great White Brotherhood. this
                goes for (c)OTO officers who try to dissuade people from joining their
                particular favourite strand of social "A.'.A.'." group/lineage/whatever.

                > There are many masters and no pupils in the realm
                > of A.'.A.'. claims and it is borderline insanity.

                false. all traditional schools with some substance to them have some
                valuable connection to the A.'.A.'., though probably by some other
                name.

                > ...There seems to be a lack of any
                > groundwork in many of the socalled "Master of the temple" wannabes.

                perhaps because you take people's email expression seriously? you'd
                know a Master of the Temple because she is busy making it possible
                for the bulk of humanity of like-composure. "wannabe"? maybe poseurs.
                it's rather difficult to fake offline witnessing and ritualizing
                activities. there are some standard symptoms -- social schedules,
                an actual temple set-up, or at least an altar or two, meetings for
                services or studies, etc.

                > I used to respect some of these people for having the balls to assume
                > the grade but have learned to see it as yet another form of Laziness
                > and lack of accomplishment. Wanna get a few quick students, call
                > yourself Frater K.R. A MASTER OF THE TEMPLE in really big letters and
                > see how many you can fool into thinking you really are. Maybe you can
                > use it to rebuild your master's (who demoted you) former Order. Of
                > course there are a few exceptions that can be found in the world,
                > somewhere... I hope... maybe. BIG MAYBE.

                we agree here. but your notions about what the AA is, how it operates,
                and how you connect with it will serve to determine the quality of
                your association. get mixed up with charlatans and for sure you'll be
                disillusioned. I'd say you went about your AA application inexpertly,
                based only on what you've said about the AA in your posts to T93-L.

                > ...the people in the know don't talk about it because they
                > don't want to deal with all those people not in the know who will
                > laugh in their faces and say they are wrong.

                this is untrue. there are many cases of people unconcerned with being
                laughed at here in this email list expressing their ideas about all
                of these subjects. if they are afraid of a little laughter, they can
                hardly be called adepti.

                > So in Thelema we live on a "don't ask, don't tell" policy because if
                > you tell the truth you will be ridiculed and if you open your mouth
                > and have no idea what you are talking about you will be ridiculed.
                > Wow, makes a lot sense to me.

                perhaps *you* live this way. I presume you're just smearing as many as
                you can with your big wide brushes, tho. if this is all you see, then
                I can certainly understand your pessimism. I'd recommend that you start
                looking more closely at what is described about the AA (and especially
                the Celestial Masters, Secret Chiefs, et al) which TRANSCENDS THE PHYSICAL
                PLANE. there are elements of instruction which can allow the interested to
                bypass all human fallability and ego (other than one's own) for the
                purposes of interacting with the Masters directly (no middle-persons!).

                Invoke me under my stars.

                > Love is the law, love under will.

                333
              • Timo F Knopf
                Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. The Silver Star may simply refer to the One Star in Sight . ... Ever heard of the twelve Rays of the Crown?
                Message 7 of 19 , Nov 16, 2001
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

                  The Silver Star may simply refer to the "One Star in Sight".

                  JB wrote:
                  > The Silver Star has eleven rays.

                  Ever heard of the twelve Rays of the Crown?
                  ...and these twelve rays are one.

                  Love is the law, love under will.
                  Fraternally,
                  273
                • John Bonanno
                  Care Circulus, ... Alas Tim, in this case I write from experience, not from what I have heard. Take it as you will. Agape Aiwass Thelema JB Fra. Absolutus
                  Message 8 of 19 , Nov 16, 2001
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Care Circulus,

                    --- In thelema93-l@y..., "Timo F Knopf" <hoor_d@y...> wrote:
                    > Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
                    >
                    > The Silver Star may simply refer to the "One Star in Sight".
                    >
                    > JB wrote:
                    > > The Silver Star has eleven rays.
                    >
                    > Ever heard of the twelve Rays of the Crown?
                    > ...and these twelve rays are one.
                    >
                    > Love is the law, love under will.
                    > Fraternally,
                    > 273
                    Alas Tim, in this case I write from experience, not from what I have
                    heard. Take it as you will.

                    Agape Aiwass Thelema
                    JB
                    Fra. Absolutus
                  • havok
                    ... Ah, yes... A very synchronistic interest of mine, that you mention here. Star Sapphire (two p s one p?), is IT repeating itself and growing? it feels to me
                    Message 9 of 19 , Nov 16, 2001
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In thelema93-l@y..., "Timo F Knopf" <hoor_d@y...> wrote:
                      > Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
                      >
                      > The Silver Star may simply refer to the "One Star in Sight".
                      >
                      > JB wrote:
                      > > The Silver Star has eleven rays.
                      >
                      > Ever heard of the twelve Rays of the Crown?
                      > ...and these twelve rays are one.

                      Ah, yes... A very synchronistic interest of mine, that you mention
                      here. Star Sapphire (two p's one p?), is IT repeating itself and
                      growing? it feels to me like continuous repetition of *The All*.
                      am i even close with this one? lol

                      11 rays from the crown that sits on the head of the Master of The
                      Temple, who has found and embraced that one star in sight, through
                      his subtle working with the pentegram and the hexegram to achieve and
                      create a union with that crown of 5&6 and himself becoming a ray of
                      light to complete the 12 rayed Crown of the Living Temple. ARARITA,
                      ARARITA, ARARITA anyone?

                      probably nothing new, just some ideas rambling onto cyberspace...


                      One,
                      -hav


                      >
                      > Love is the law, love under will.
                      > Fraternally,
                      > 273
                    • Timo F Knopf
                      ... have ... Hey John, 93! I didn t even want to one-up you -- rather I wanted to add a different perspective, the ever heard of.. phrase didn t mean to
                      Message 10 of 19 , Nov 17, 2001
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        > > JB wrote:
                        > > > The Silver Star has eleven rays.
                        > >
                        > > Ever heard of the twelve Rays of the Crown?
                        > > ...and these twelve rays are one.
                        > >
                        > > Love is the law, love under will.
                        > > Fraternally,
                        > > 273
                        > Alas Tim, in this case I write from experience, not from what I
                        have
                        > heard. Take it as you will.


                        Hey John, 93!

                        I didn't even want to "one-up" you -- rather I wanted
                        to add a different perspective, the "ever heard of.." phrase
                        didn't mean to imply that I know better than you.

                        Also, the remark contains a little pun which you
                        probably missed, which comes to no surprise
                        as it really is an inside joke for only a very few people on this
                        list.

                        Also there are different "secret" meanings of A.'.A.'. --
                        my favourite being Attain/Assist.

                        93 93/93
                        Fraternally,
                        273
                      • Jason Carpenter
                        Apparently some people missed the point in this old joke I circulate when OTO commentaries appear. Switch the letters OTO and AA and it makes sense, though the
                        Message 11 of 19 , Nov 17, 2001
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Apparently some people missed the point in this old joke I circulate
                          when OTO commentaries appear. Switch the letters OTO and AA and it
                          makes sense, though the arguement in both cases can be legit in a
                          purely material sense. I provided some commentary based on a few of T-
                          man's comments.

                          > Teitan<###>/Jason Carpenter again makes ridiculous generalized
                          assertions
                          > about "the A.'. A.'." as if there is only one way to interpret this
                          phrase
                          > or the beings associated with it.

                          LOL. Sure, sure.

                          largely he is talking about human social
                          > lineages here (associated with Crowley/VVVVV, George Cecil
                          Jones/DDS, not
                          > transcendental wisdom manifest through the aura of the adepts and
                          conferred
                          > through informal, individual, initiations.

                          I am not actually talking about it, but ridiculing the idea of it.
                          The GWB is much more than the people who engage in these "love ins"
                          seem to think.

                          > I will be contrasting my own preferred notion of the AA, though
                          unlike
                          > Jason I will not pretend that his Lesser AA does not exist, or fail
                          to
                          > address it, as he has done several times in addressing questions
                          about
                          > it in T93-l. perhaps this is because he knows no more than the
                          social
                          > group. if the latter is not the case, perhaps he'll say more.

                          In actuality, yes I do indeed. I prefer not to discuss because it is
                          not my place to discuss, I am a social commentator. The reality of
                          the matter is magick of the type that the archetypal "A.'.A.'."
                          represents (I prefer the term GWB myself) is so personal that sharing
                          it is just not desirable on my part. To totally seperate what you
                          call the "social order" and the factual current the way you do though
                          results in a peculiar fallacy, similar to talking about the gods
                          without discussing their earthly manifestations, Zeus and lightning
                          for example.

                          > "Jason Carpenter" <teitan111@y...>:
                          > > The A.'.A.'. is an organization whose membership for some reason
                          > > believes that they must keep such a secret, which is in direct
                          > > violation of the letters of their Oaths.
                          >
                          > the AA's membership does not have a coherent position on anything of
                          > which I have been able to determine. neither do all members of the
                          AA
                          > (however called) believe that they must keep it a secret, nor do
                          they all
                          > believe that they have "Oaths" or even that there is such a thing as
                          > "membership" per se (as compared to a networked association).

                          I agree with you, except for the fact that the A.'.A.'. I refer to is
                          the one AC generated in the early part of the last century whose
                          Oaths very clearly delineate that one is to OPENLY proclaim their
                          membership and discuss the A.'.A.'. and it's principles to all they
                          meet. This is sort of along the lines of the Comment arguements I
                          suppose, Oaths demand study and interpretation then the comment,
                          written before the Oaths in question (OTO)forbids it.

                          > > If any of the current
                          > > leadership of the A.'.A>'. is to be taken as an example of the
                          kinds
                          > > of Adepts that the A.'.A.'. produces, it is indeed a failed
                          system of
                          > > initiation because the leaders have failed in fulfilling in the
                          > > letter of their Oaths that they claim to hold so sacred.
                          >
                          > then perhaps you're looking at the wrong "A.'.A.'." leaders. the AA
                          that
                          > I know has no leadership of which I am aware. all members are
                          acquainted
                          > only with their immediate initiator, and, if they somehow find it of
                          > value, those whom any particular individual may themselves
                          initiate. this
                          > is different than an "initiatic organization" (like (c)OTO) which
                          uses
                          > ceremonies and initiations for membership criteria (the AA does not
                          do
                          > this, as I know it).

                          The Universal Order described in V&V yes, but my critique can be
                          taken as a view of the material manifestation and it's myriad
                          offshoots today. In my examinations of various claimants all
                          scream "We are the only A.'.A.'.". Hmmm. I doubt it. Links into the
                          chain of universal brotherhood can be forged by anyone, and the
                          different schools of magick etc can assist in providing the necessary
                          links, and a balanced student learns to use all three schools in his
                          exploration of the universal brotherhood. Thelema breaks down at
                          certain levels and can no longer be viewed as a good model of the
                          universe and driving processes of social and moral interaction.
                          Interrelation between various people of various religious standings
                          requires the model of the ROsicrucians.

                          > > The work of the A.'.A.'. is based on the the concept of
                          Scientific
                          > > Illuminism and that "Mystery is the Enemy of Truth".
                          >
                          > I was unaware of this principle or concept. my impression is that
                          mystery
                          > is an important part of mystical life, and that its dimensions
                          conforms
                          > rather negatively to the control which the aspirant may wish to
                          level upon
                          > the world at large.

                          Have you read the Oaths of Uncle Al?

                          mystery is a spice for the mystic, and Scientific
                          > Illuminism, as practiced by the bulk of humans, is truly neither
                          scientific
                          > nor illuminating -- in fact it too often becomes religious and
                          dogmatic.

                          My exact criticism of the current disease infecting Thelema and it's
                          social aspects. Emphasis on a mass etc. Recruits blah blah blah.

                          > > In Theory it is
                          > > probably the most profound and simple systems of attainment
                          possible,
                          > > being based on the idea that the Sepheroth can be used as guides
                          to
                          > > greater and greater levels of consciousness.


                          > this may hold within the group(s) started by VVVVV (Crowley) and DDS
                          > (GCJones), but as a whole, the Great White Brotherhood doesn't seem
                          to
                          > require Jewish, Gnostic, stolen, invented, traditional, or
                          particular
                          > mystical tools for the connection to the Current and self-
                          initiation.

                          Preach it Sister! I agree with you wholeheartedly and mayhap you have
                          broken through the barrier and mayhaps understood on a different
                          level and have yet to realize that I am saying similar ideals as
                          yourself.

                          > some apparently favour Hermetic pseudo-Jewish numerolinguistics and
                          > some Lurianic ideas about the cosmos, but at best this is a subset
                          of
                          > the AA as a whole (as the GWB, which Crowley indicated he was
                          describing
                          > in the publication "One Star in Sight").

                          He was describing a development that occured under him as the GWB
                          defies any attempt to place a logical progression on it in the sense
                          that AC appoints through the Sepherotic grading systems. As per Liber
                          AL there are but three grades and they do not appear to be grades at
                          all but mayhaps better defined as approaches to attainment,
                          approaches that each student must master in all levels before thought
                          of the GWB should even enter his head. Hmmm.

                          > > Working in the strictest
                          > > sense of A.'.A.'. accomplishment though, most human being can
                          never
                          > > make it beyond Neophyte or Zelator lacking the discipline
                          necessary
                          > > to master the subtle aspects of the body required for the
                          advanced
                          > > work beyond the Zelator degree.
                          >
                          > my impression is that so much confusion surrounds the Body of the
                          Divine
                          > (or whatever you'd like to call it), that charlatans are able to
                          create
                          > fabricated social lineages and call them by a recognized name of the
                          > Celestial Masters (Secret Chiefs, Tibetan Masters, etc.) but
                          without any
                          > conferment of consciousness-development. that is, people *imagine*
                          that
                          > they "attain" or "accomplish" and have no scientific background from
                          > which to discern actual progress. ego-inflation or personality-
                          cults are
                          > the typical result, with much ado made about what specific
                          individuals
                          > have created (noticed the focus on the AC/GCJ "A.'.A.'." rather
                          than to
                          > expand the discussion to the way that the GWB as a whole actually
                          works).

                          Agreed, in a completely esoteric sense.
                          >
                          > > Call it A.D.D. or what you will, I
                          > > call it the curse of the human race in this modern age, LAZINESS.
                          >
                          > that's your Protestant Work Ethic showing. laziness (as in the
                          course of
                          > a river, or the wu-wei of Taoism) is too often UNDERstudied.
                          aspirants
                          > to Hermetic systems typically want to do much more than they are
                          able
                          > and with insufficient studies to make heads or tails out of what
                          would
                          > be practically advantageous for them to pursue. when a newbie goes
                          to a
                          > "Thelemic" forum and asks how they should proceed, typically they
                          are
                          > given some pat standard book, org, or ritual, and told to engage it,
                          > but without any real consideration of the character and nature of
                          the
                          > person who is asking, what they should be finding, or toward what
                          any of
                          > these ought to lead ("I say they're Thelemic, so they are,
                          dammit!").

                          LOL. I agree wholeheartedly. The heart is the best guide, and listen
                          to it.
                          >
                          > > ...those
                          > > who do possess the discipline to step beyond these bounds often
                          stop
                          > > th necessary Yoga work required by the A.'.A.'. after passing the
                          > > initial test and fail to accomplish any work of note.
                          >
                          > unfortunately too many cannot see the trees of actual accomplishment
                          > for the forest of "adepti" who have gone before them and recommended
                          > their patented method of "progress". where are the Thelemites who
                          start
                          > questioning the *reality* of progress? discern between self-
                          delusion as
                          > a pitfall and something that actually produces self-transformation?

                          LOL.

                          > ultimately those who create these systems don't seem to care much
                          for
                          > the condition or course of the newbie that comes after them. they
                          are
                          > more interested in emphasizing their position with respect to an
                          org,
                          > their authority so as to better be able to convince, and their
                          wisdom
                          > and power so as to inspire a cult in their wake (e.g. Crowleyanity).

                          This is a common disease in so called spiritual movements, and more
                          often results in horrendous tragedies.

                          > > A disciplined body is a disciplined mind. I also apply this same
                          > > criticism to myself.
                          >
                          > the two are worthy of separate and comparable disciplines, related
                          in
                          > character to the medium of the operand. bodily disciplines work on
                          > muscles, mental disciplines work on synapses, mystical disciplines
                          work
                          > on the spirit.

                          Agreed.

                          > > The A.'.A.'. is subject to a lot of infighting based on it's
                          degree
                          > > system and the misunderstanding that many people have of how it
                          works
                          > > and what it means.
                          >
                          > we agree! not just "infighting". it's a struggle for appearance and
                          for
                          > position. any struggle associated with the A.'.A.'. must be founded
                          on
                          > bogus principles, from what I can see. if you see someone struggling
                          > for authority, competing with others, etc., you can pretty well
                          assume
                          > that hey have no real connection to the Great White Brotherhood.
                          this
                          > goes for (c)OTO officers who try to dissuade people from joining
                          their
                          > particular favourite strand of social "A.'.A.'."
                          group/lineage/whatever.

                          LOL, indeed we do in ways that mayhaps we never realized on a more
                          intimate level. =)

                          > > There are many masters and no pupils in the realm
                          > > of A.'.A.'. claims and it is borderline insanity.
                          >
                          > false. all traditional schools with some substance to them have
                          some
                          > valuable connection to the A.'.A.'., though probably by some other
                          > name.

                          Missed the point of the sentence. Reread it in the sense of the
                          Thelemic community and the prevalent social attitudes towards the
                          A.'.A.'. as in the personality cult of AC.

                          > > ...There seems to be a lack of any
                          > > groundwork in many of the socalled "Master of the temple"
                          wannabes.
                          >
                          > perhaps because you take people's email expression seriously? you'd
                          > know a Master of the Temple because she is busy making it possible
                          > for the bulk of humanity of like-composure. "wannabe"? maybe
                          poseurs.
                          > it's rather difficult to fake offline witnessing and ritualizing
                          > activities. there are some standard symptoms -- social schedules,
                          > an actual temple set-up, or at least an altar or two, meetings for
                          > services or studies, etc.

                          I knew a few of these claimants I am criticizing and lived with one
                          remember?

                          > > I used to respect some of these people for having the balls to
                          assume
                          > > the grade but have learned to see it as yet another form of
                          Laziness
                          > > and lack of accomplishment. Wanna get a few quick students, call
                          > > yourself Frater K.R. A MASTER OF THE TEMPLE in really big letters
                          and
                          > > see how many you can fool into thinking you really are. Maybe you
                          can
                          > > use it to rebuild your master's (who demoted you) former Order.
                          Of
                          > > course there are a few exceptions that can be found in the world,
                          > > somewhere... I hope... maybe. BIG MAYBE.
                          >
                          > we agree here. but your notions about what the AA is, how it
                          operates,
                          > and how you connect with it will serve to determine the quality of
                          > your association. get mixed up with charlatans and for sure you'll
                          be
                          > disillusioned. I'd say you went about your AA application
                          inexpertly,
                          > based only on what you've said about the AA in your posts to T93-L.

                          Actually, I was only exposed to SOTO and Bersson's trad of the
                          A.'.A.'. for two years. WHen I found the internet I saw the reality
                          of it. My usual arguements about A.'.A.'. do deal specifically with
                          the social (miscalled) manifestation of the order as opposed to GWB.

                          > > ...the people in the know don't talk about it because they
                          > > don't want to deal with all those people not in the know who will
                          > > laugh in their faces and say they are wrong.
                          >
                          > this is untrue. there are many cases of people unconcerned with
                          being
                          > laughed at here in this email list expressing their ideas about all
                          > of these subjects. if they are afraid of a little laughter, they can
                          > hardly be called adepti.

                          LOL, too true. I agree with you 100%.

                          > > So in Thelema we live on a "don't ask, don't tell" policy because
                          if
                          > > you tell the truth you will be ridiculed and if you open your
                          mouth
                          > > and have no idea what you are talking about you will be
                          ridiculed.
                          > > Wow, makes a lot sense to me.
                          >
                          > perhaps *you* live this way. I presume you're just smearing as many
                          as
                          > you can with your big wide brushes, tho. if this is all you see,
                          then
                          > I can certainly understand your pessimism. I'd recommend that you
                          start
                          > looking more closely at what is described about the AA (and
                          especially
                          > the Celestial Masters, Secret Chiefs, et al) which TRANSCENDS THE
                          PHYSICAL
                          > PLANE. there are elements of instruction which can allow the
                          interested to
                          > bypass all human fallability and ego (other than one's own) for the
                          > purposes of interacting with the Masters directly (no middle-
                          persons!).

                          I have actually begun the journey on that path that you describe.
                          Let's drop the A>'.A.'. BS, we could easily call it Alpha et Omega or
                          the GWB. Hmmm.

                          Jason

                          > Invoke me under my stars.
                          >
                          > > Love is the law, love under will.
                          >
                          > 333
                        • 333
                          50011201 VI om ... The word of Sin is Restriction. ... yeah? that d be nice. a magic star. related to Kteis and Da ath? ... sure. not sure they are related.
                          Message 12 of 19 , Dec 1, 2001
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            50011201 VI om

                            "Timo F Knopf" <hoor_d@...>:
                            > Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

                            The word of Sin is Restriction.

                            JB:
                            >> The Silver Star has eleven rays.

                            yeah? that'd be nice. a magic star. related to Kteis and Da'ath?

                            > Ever heard of the twelve Rays of the Crown?

                            sure. not sure they are related. there's a Revelations image with
                            Mary or someone with a 12-point crown standing on the crescent moon.

                            > ...and these twelve rays are one.

                            what am I missing?! I thought it was a foregone conclusion that
                            the Silver Star of the AA is the septagram with all the sevens
                            in it that could also be a Babalonian thing. it has a circled
                            cross outside it, if memory serves. I'm too lazy to go into the
                            house now to look. :>

                            can someone inform me what that star is and how I might have got
                            the impression it was the star of the AA? thanks.

                            Invoke me under my stars.

                            > Love is the law, love under will.
                          • eyeofhoor@yahoo.com
                            ... Nigris, It s featured on the cover of The Commentaries of AL and other A.A. publications. Prophet 718
                            Message 13 of 19 , Dec 2, 2001
                            View Source
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In thelema93-l@y..., 333 <nagasiva@l...> wrote:

                              >
                              > what am I missing?! I thought it was a foregone conclusion that
                              > the Silver Star of the AA is the septagram with all the sevens
                              > in it that could also be a Babalonian thing. it has a circled
                              > cross outside it, if memory serves. I'm too lazy to go into the
                              > house now to look. :>
                              >
                              > can someone inform me what that star is and how I might have got
                              > the impression it was the star of the AA? thanks.


                              Nigris,

                              It's featured on the cover of The Commentaries of AL and other A.A.
                              publications.

                              Prophet 718
                            • otto.omicron@post.cz
                              ... Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. The reference to the twelve rays is from the Holy Book: Liber DCCCXIII Vel ARARITA Sub Figura DLXX, and
                              Message 14 of 19 , Dec 2, 2001
                              View Source
                              • 0 Attachment
                                > > Ever heard of the twelve Rays of the Crown?
                                >
                                > sure. not sure they are related. there's a Revelations image with
                                > Mary or someone with a 12-point crown standing on the crescent moon.
                                >
                                > > ...and these twelve rays are one.
                                >
                                > what am I missing?! I thought it was a foregone conclusion that
                                > the Silver Star of the AA is the septagram with all the sevens
                                > in it that could also be a Babalonian thing. it has a circled
                                > cross outside it, if memory serves. I'm too lazy to go into the
                                > house now to look. :>
                                >
                                > can someone inform me what that star is and how I might have got
                                > the impression it was the star of the AA? thanks.
                                >

                                Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

                                The reference to the 'twelve rays' is from the Holy Book: Liber
                                DCCCXIII Vel ARARITA Sub Figura DLXX, and refers not necesarrily to
                                the 'star of the AA'. The septagram you refer to is the Seal of the
                                A.:A.: [also known as the Seal of Babalon] and the 'circled cross' is
                                actually the sign of N.O.X. the Night of Pan.

                                Hope this helps.

                                Love is the law, love under will.

                                Frater Omicron
                              • 333
                                50011229 VI om do what you please, for that is my Law. ... it was to no total separation that I intended to lend support, merely a clear discernment between
                                Message 15 of 19 , Dec 29, 2001
                                View Source
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  50011229 VI om

                                  do what you please, for that is my Law.

                                  333 on the road:
                                  >> ...I will not pretend that [Jason's] Lesser AA [social] does not exist,
                                  >> or fail to address it.... perhaps this is because he knows no more
                                  >> than the social group. if the latter is not the case, perhaps he'll
                                  >> say more.

                                  "Jason Carpenter" <teitan111@...>:
                                  > In actuality, yes I do indeed. I prefer not to discuss because it is
                                  > not my place to discuss, I am a social commentator. The reality of
                                  > the matter is magick of the type that the archetypal "A.'.A.'."
                                  > represents (I prefer the term GWB myself) is so personal that sharing
                                  > it is just not desirable on my part. To totally seperate what you
                                  > call the "social order" and the factual current the way you do though
                                  > results in a peculiar fallacy, similar to talking about the gods
                                  > without discussing their earthly manifestations, Zeus and lightning
                                  > for example.

                                  it was to no total separation that I intended to lend support, merely
                                  a clear discernment between what has seemed to me a partial picture
                                  (the A.'.A.'.; a limited temporal and social lineage or set of lineages
                                  initiated by ACrowley and GCJones) and one more complete (the GWB et al;
                                  of which this A.'.A.'. wishes to be seen as at least part and, in its
                                  more arrogant moments, the whole, upon which we apparently agree).

                                  "Jason Carpenter" <teitan111@y...>:
                                  >>> The A.'.A.'. is an organization whose membership for some reason
                                  >>> believes that they must keep such a secret, which is in direct
                                  >>> violation of the letters of their Oaths.

                                  > ...the A.'.A.'. I refer to is the one AC generated in the early
                                  > part of the last century whose Oaths very clearly delineate that
                                  > one is to OPENLY proclaim their membership and discuss the
                                  > A.'.A.'. and it's principles to all they meet.

                                  could you specifically identify where this clear delineation is to
                                  be found (i.e. in which oaths, perhaps with a quote of it/them)?

                                  >>> If any of the current leadership of the A.'.A.'. is to be taken
                                  >>> as an example of the kinds of Adepts that the A.'.A.'. produces,
                                  >>> it is indeed a failed system of initiation because the leaders
                                  >>> have failed in fulfilling in the letter of their Oaths that they
                                  >>> claim to hold so sacred.

                                  > ...my critique can be
                                  > taken as a view of the material manifestation and it's myriad
                                  > offshoots today. In my examinations of various claimants all
                                  > scream "We are the only A.'.A.'.".

                                  this is an incredibly valuable point, though I have myself met
                                  with individuals (one of whom I interviewed and have made this
                                  interview known to the public) whose participation both within
                                  the AC/GCJ A.'.A.'. and the more expansive GWB did not support,
                                  in his mind, the justification for such an exclusivist claim.

                                  HOWEVER, with that said, he also wished to remain anonymous, and
                                  I do not remember a single member of the A.'.A.'. of AC/GCJ social
                                  lineages who wished to profess this membership to the world. I am
                                  very intrigued by the point you are raising and would like to be
                                  pointed to the oath(s) in question.

                                  > ...Links into the
                                  > chain of universal brotherhood can be forged by anyone,

                                  this far I follow you and agree, though for the adept of the GWB,
                                  I'd suggest that a brief exposure to and interview with an
                                  individual would probably give them insight into actual linkage.
                                  inasmuch as knowledge of another's station is impossible to obtain
                                  with certainty, we are agreed.

                                  > and the
                                  > different schools of magick etc can assist in providing the necessary
                                  > links,
                                  > and a balanced student learns to use all three schools in his
                                  > exploration of the universal brotherhood.

                                  I'd need elaboration to understand you here. are you referring here
                                  to Crowley's "Three Schools" which he hues (if memory serves) in
                                  "Magick Without Tears", the 'White', 'Black', and 'Yellow'? if so,
                                  why do you find value in this schema? how do you map the group(s)
                                  of which we are speaking into this tripartite categorization? if
                                  not, could you broaden my understanding of your expression?

                                  > Thelema breaks down at
                                  > certain levels and can no longer be viewed as a good model of the
                                  > universe and driving processes of social and moral interaction.

                                  I'm unsure to what you are referring when you say "Thelema" in that
                                  it may break down. how is Thelema (presumably something theoretical
                                  and perhaps social?) a 'model' at all? where does its modelling
                                  find value as you have suggested? what I'm getting at here is that
                                  I'm not sure that there is any truly coherent "Thelema" model to
                                  which we may turn, as compared to a scrap heap of expostulations in
                                  the wake of "The Master Therion" which are at times self-contra-
                                  dictory and philosophically fallacious or incomplete. it is quite
                                  possible that you were making this exact point and I missed it.
                                  sorry if this is the case.

                                  all the same, since you wish to speak of "Thelema" in this way, is
                                  there something you could say about the exact substance and limit
                                  of this model, more than merely criticizing its inferior qualities?
                                  i.e. how would you compare it, for example, to notions espoused by
                                  Schopenhauer or Fichte, to whom Crowley enjoys referring the student,
                                  or to other models which you feel are somehow better constructed?

                                  > Interrelation between various people of various religious standings
                                  > requires the model of the ROsicrucians.

                                  could you say more about this, why there is such a requirement, and
                                  to what model (perhaps along the lines of Manly P. Hall and his
                                  "Secret Teachings of All Ages" or Case's "The True and Invisible
                                  Rosicrucian Order"?) you are referring?

                                  >>> The work of the A.'.A.'. is based on the the concept of Scientific
                                  >>> Illuminism and that "Mystery is the Enemy of Truth".
                                  >>
                                  >> I was unaware of this principle or concept. my impression is that
                                  >> mystery is an important part of mystical life, and that its
                                  >> dimensions conforms rather negatively to the control which the
                                  >> aspirant may wish to level upon the world at large.
                                  >
                                  > Have you read the Oaths of Uncle Al?

                                  probably not sufficiently to understand your point, though I am
                                  quite interested and will peruse my "Gems From the Equinox" at
                                  some point after my return home in order to discern your meaning.
                                  anything you could say about this in the mean time would facilitate
                                  my following your criticism and, perhaps, taking it up myself. ;>

                                  >> mystery is a spice for the mystic, and Scientific Illuminism,
                                  >> as practiced by the bulk of humans, is truly neither scientific
                                  >> nor illuminating -- in fact it too often becomes religious and
                                  >> dogmatic.
                                  >
                                  > My exact criticism of the current disease infecting Thelema and it's
                                  > social aspects. Emphasis on a mass etc. Recruits blah blah blah.

                                  >> <snip>

                                  > Preach it Sister! I agree with you wholeheartedly and mayhap you have
                                  > broken through the barrier and mayhaps understood on a different
                                  > level and have yet to realize that I am saying similar ideals as
                                  > yourself.

                                  thank you for making our alliance and similarity of thought more
                                  clear to me.

                                  >> some apparently favour Hermetic pseudo-Jewish numerolinguistics and
                                  >> some Lurianic ideas about the cosmos, but at best this is a subset
                                  >> of the AA as a whole (as the GWB, which Crowley indicated he was
                                  >> describing in the publication "One Star in Sight").
                                  >
                                  > He was describing a development that occured under him as the GWB
                                  > defies any attempt to place a logical progression on it in the sense
                                  > that AC appoints through the Sepherotic grading systems.

                                  agreed.

                                  > As per Liber
                                  > AL there are but three grades and they do not appear to be grades at
                                  > all but mayhaps better defined as approaches to attainment,
                                  > approaches that each student must master in all levels before thought
                                  > of the GWB should even enter his head. Hmmm.

                                  could you say more about why you value this 3-grade system?
                                  I understand it to be at least masonic ('the Three Degrees of
                                  (conventional) Masonry'), but I'm curious as to why you might
                                  think it, especially as specified in the Evul Book (Crowley's
                                  scripture: Man of Earth, Lover, Hermit), ought to be considered
                                  a facet of the levels of attainment in some universal sense
                                  (for all species? just humans? for all time? etc.).

                                  with the above clarifications we've arranged in mind....

                                  >>> Working in the strictest
                                  >>> sense of A.'.A.'. accomplishment though, most human being can
                                  >>> never make it beyond Neophyte or Zelator lacking the discipline
                                  >>> necessary to master the subtle aspects of the body required for
                                  >>> the advanced work beyond the Zelator degree.

                                  >>> Call it A.D.D. or what you will, I
                                  >>> call it the curse of the human race in this modern age, LAZINESS.

                                  I know we've agreed regarding the heart of the problem about a lack
                                  of preparatory study (leading to all manner of ridiculous assumption
                                  and claims, hyperactivity, etc.), but I'd also like to propose a
                                  more *excusable* deficit in the Rosicrucian edifices Thelemic and
                                  their failures to produce either evidence of attainment or indeed
                                  to achieve the states described beyond rudimentary levels (Neophyte
                                  and Zelator, etc.). it is a deficit which I simultaneously loathe,
                                  because of its exclusivist and elitist complications, and yet to
                                  which I am drawn because of the convincing lessons afforded to me
                                  by my tantrikan guru and help-meet, sri catyananda (specifically
                                  pertaining to matters inherited and biological, which have become
                                  a lifetime study on her part).

                                  I'd contend that we should probably consider the CAPACITY of the
                                  aspirant with respect to both mysticism *and* to the application of
                                  will. I don't mean here to indicate that what we have mentioned is
                                  of necessity simply a problem of 'stick-to-it-iveness' or avoiding
                                  laziness in 'covering the basics' (Crowley's focus on 'a classic
                                  education' notwithstanding, since much of his suggestion is purely
                                  intellectual and literary in character).

                                  another way of saying this is that certain individuals simply do or
                                  do not have the APTITUDE for magic or more specifically for Magick
                                  in the popular Crowleyan sense. it would be no more a fault of
                                  myopia or inattention in general that a musician, athlete, or artist,
                                  (to use examples of which the Beast was himself fond) was incapable
                                  of developing hir skill in these areas beyond an apparent inborn or
                                  potential aptitude. it would not be fair to say that an aspirant to
                                  the deftness or adroitness of a master in any of these areas whose
                                  practice and education were top rate and yet whose performance was
                                  not to the calibre of said masters was somehow an inferior student.
                                  no, this would be a dismissal of the level of effort involved, and
                                  one which my (admittedly limited) study of the ARISING OF MASTERY
                                  ITSELF does NOT support.

                                  whether we couch this in terms of some glorious Destiny on par
                                  with a 'True Will' (i.e. it may or may not be my true will to be
                                  a successful magician and/or mystic), or whether we see it in
                                  terms of some kind of inheritable and therefore *actuatable* skill,
                                  inborn and refined to blossoming with the proper conditions and
                                  in its proper timing, the point remains that, at least according
                                  to the hypothesis I am proposing here, a true master is not only
                                  MADE (refined through discipline and dedication to the Arte, as
                                  it were), but BORN.

                                  if considering the expansive application of the model of the
                                  Magical Link described semi-lucidly by Crowley in his "Magick in
                                  Theory and Practice" (Book Four, Part Three, especially
                                  Chapter XIV), it is insufficient merely to be a student ('a nose
                                  capable of being blown') with a system or method of magic/k or
                                  mysticism ('some mechanism by which this nose may be blown,
                                  complete with the force necessary to see it through). it must also
                                  be one's TRUE WILL to be so successful (i.e. 'it is my Will that
                                  the nose is to be blown') and no amount of effort and study will
                                  avail more than a modest effect to those not so well-placed in the
                                  cosmic circumstance.

                                  thus we may be critical of the 'laziness' of modern students of
                                  magic/k and mysticism, and yet it seems quite unfair to me to
                                  generalize on the whole, because there are certainly a goodly
                                  number of sincere students who really have applied ourselves,
                                  and some of us may well simply lack the aptitude or capacity
                                  (one might consider it volitional strength and compare it with
                                  bodily structure and potential for various recreational or
                                  artistic feats) to approach the quality of past masters in
                                  whose glamour we choose to bask.

                                  in such a case, laziness may not be the problem of modern
                                  Rosicrucians or Thelemites, so much as misplacement or
                                  insufficient raw materials in the Creation of the
                                  Philosopher's Stone. it may be that one's efforts are better
                                  applied not to magic/k or mysticism but instead to butchery
                                  or plowing, to becoming a pugilist or thebian.

                                  >>> ...those who do possess the discipline to step beyond these
                                  >>> bounds often stop th necessary Yoga work required by the
                                  >>> A.'.A.'. after passing the initial test and fail to
                                  >>> accomplish any work of note.

                                  again, it may be that the yoga is simply inaccessible or
                                  avails one naught.

                                  >>> A disciplined body is a disciplined mind. I also apply this same
                                  >>> criticism to myself.

                                  and yet is discipline all that is necessary? the above hypothesis
                                  calls into question the legitimacy of your criticisms, as well as
                                  many of my own in this and previous threads.

                                  >> ...bodily disciplines work on muscles, mental disciplines
                                  >> work on synapses, mystical disciplines work on the spirit.
                                  >
                                  > Agreed.

                                  in turn, not everyone can be a superior javelin-thrower, marathon
                                  runner, chess player, sculptor, or whirling dervish. and more
                                  importantly for our consideration, it may well be that NO amount
                                  of work may be sufficient to refine the dedicated student to the
                                  Art should one be insufficiently endowed from the beginning.

                                  if this is true, then the CHARACTER, the raw material from which
                                  such refinement proceeds, should be the observation and study of
                                  those who wish to establish systems that 'make magicians', for
                                  only in applying the proper force to the proper OBJECT in the
                                  proper way is magic/k likely to be successful, even if that magicK
                                  is to make of oneself a magician, Magus, etc.

                                  >>> There are many masters and no pupils in the realm
                                  >>> of A.'.A.'. claims and it is borderline insanity.

                                  > ...in the sense of the Thelemic community and the
                                  > prevalent social attitudes towards the A.'.A.'. as in
                                  > the personality cult of AC.

                                  thank you for your contextualizing of this comment. could
                                  you provide some reflections of these attitudes with a few
                                  quotes from popular A.'.A.'. sources as examples? I'm
                                  thinking of examining the expressions of notable and visible
                                  AC/GCJ AA members like Crowley, GCJones, their immediate
                                  students, and those whom it is known they instructed. for my
                                  part, I can probably pull out quotes from 'In the Continuum',
                                  which originates in the 'College of Thelema' and adheres to
                                  the editorial oversight of Soror Meral, and may be able to
                                  restate some pertinent material from the (c)OTO's "Magical
                                  Link" wherein Hymenaeus Beta or some other goes out on a limb.
                                  I may also be able to draw from popular authors like Duquette
                                  and Suster, if these are even relevant. Eschelmann appears to be.

                                  >>> ...There seems to be a lack of any groundwork in many of
                                  >>> the socalled "Master of the temple" wannabes.

                                  > I knew a few of these claimants I am criticizing and lived
                                  > with one remember?

                                  the more of which you can remind me and to which you might point
                                  in your criticism (specifically by NAME and with direct quotes),
                                  the better able we'll be to drive this point home and discuss it
                                  in some more depth than what may otherwise appear to be sniping.

                                  > Actually, I was only exposed to SOTO and Bersson's trad of the
                                  > A.'.A.'. for two years. WHen I found the internet I saw the reality
                                  > of it. My usual arguements about A.'.A.'. do deal specifically with
                                  > the social (miscalled) manifestation of the order as opposed to GWB.

                                  fabulous, then our efforts are allied. I think we can forge greater
                                  headway into AA-study in our exposure of social failure and fallacy.

                                  >>> So in Thelema we live on a "don't ask, don't tell" policy
                                  >>> because if you tell the truth you will be ridiculed and if
                                  >>> you open your mouth and have no idea what you are talking
                                  >>> about you will be ridiculed. Wow, makes a lot sense to me.

                                  >> ...if this is all you see, then I can certainly understand
                                  >> your pessimism. ...what is described about the AA (and
                                  >> especially the Celestial Masters, Secret Chiefs, et al) which
                                  >> TRANSCENDS THE PHYSICAL PLANE. there are elements of
                                  >> instruction which can allow the interested to bypass all
                                  >> human fallability and ego (other than one's own) for the
                                  >> purposes of interacting with the Masters directly (no middle-
                                  >> persons!).
                                  >
                                  > I have actually begun the journey on that path that you describe.

                                  I shall begin to presume as much since our observations and
                                  expressions seem to be so aligned. this being an internet
                                  channel such estimations are, of course, prone to error, but
                                  at least we're not talking about exclusive authority and
                                  riddling our criticisms here with the grandiose arrogance
                                  which we are ourselves criticizing -- hypocrisy and myopia
                                  are but two weaknesses which may be highlighted profitably.

                                  > Let's drop the A.'.A.'. BS, we could easily call it Alpha
                                  > et Omega or the GWB. Hmmm.

                                  given that this is a forum ostensibly dedicated to "Thelema",
                                  I think it valuable to retain the "BS name", AA, in favour of
                                  emphasizing what *should* be found within it given its
                                  claims to authority and spiritual inspiration, simultaneously
                                  contrasting this with what we (and more importantly any
                                  interested investigator and researcher) ACTUALLY find in the
                                  culture and written expressions of those who may be said to
                                  represent or exemplify its socially authoritative calibre.

                                  your argument on this point has always been a valuable one,
                                  yet I find following it to lead to too many obtuse and,
                                  eventually, obfuscatory results, especially for newcomers to
                                  the subject and the 'Thelemic' culture. additional suggestions
                                  for our lexicon of choice welcomed. :>

                                  free love, right now!

                                  333
                                • christitan93
                                  ... failures to produce either evidence of attainment or indeed to achieve the states described beyond rudimentary levels (Neophyte and Zelator, etc.). I would
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Dec 29, 2001
                                  View Source
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In thelema93-l@y..., 333 <nagasiva@l...> wrote:
                                    failures to produce either evidence of attainment or indeed to achieve
                                    the states described beyond rudimentary levels (Neophyte and Zelator,
                                    etc.).

                                    I would argue that it is the failure to initatiate the Neophyte and
                                    Zelator states that results in the confusion in the temple.
                                    The real Neophyte should be endowed with a hearty portion of
                                    Neschamah decending into the Nephesh. When this fails to happen the
                                    Lower Will dominates.
                                    The Zelator has contact with the astral plane. The physiological
                                    paramaters neccesary to achive this requires advanced yoga and trance
                                    technniques. The brain chemistry must be altered and then
                                    equilbriated. The equlibiration of altered states in the four worlds
                                    would prevent much of the hysteria in the outer courts.

                                    CT
                                    --------------------------------------------------------------------

                                    The irrational mage in his rush to the glories of the splendid
                                    visions is most definately exacerbated by Crowleys reputation as a
                                    drug fiend. Hadits slippery slope. The candidate rushes up into the
                                    astral plane but for only a moment and then crashes down, poisioned
                                    from the drugs. Whaterver irrational impression they recieve they
                                    attempt to translate into a Key To It All Prophesy. On the other hand
                                    if you have trained your body with yoga and meditaion, the glands and
                                    nervous system are balanced and vigorus. The chemistry of the "strange
                                    drugs" has a completely different reaction. The body can handel the
                                    "thwack" and the consciousness is able to utilize the radical shift in
                                    brain chemistry to explore itself.
                                    I think the failure in our Magickal Society is a failure to achive
                                    the balanced vigor physiologically necessary, through yoga or any
                                    other means, to have a real effect on the physical world. The
                                    magicains of old had a profound effect on the physical world. Even the
                                    Freemasons as recent as the Democratic revolutions in the Americas in
                                    the 1700 & 1800's, used magical means to alter the physical world.
                                    This may be by design. Our food and water have been poisioned.
                                    We are losing a magickal war, or are we? From a GWB point of view we
                                    are.The winners will be Thelemites but it will be thoses corporate
                                    Titans whose will could not be crushed. Are they the Black
                                    Brotherhood, Satan? Who is altering the world? I imagine the most
                                    powerful corporate head to have a 93 tatooed on his penis. I chuckle,
                                    but the reality is too dreadfuly serious. Who has the balls to step up
                                    and take control of the game. We have the tools. We just don't have
                                    the nerve. It is safer to fight with each other than to take on the
                                    Great Satan.
                                    And what GWB values do we share anymore? What is our mission in the
                                    21st Century, it seems like it might change from time to time.

                                    Muddled,

                                    CT
                                  • teitan111
                                    You will have to excuse for not replying just yet. I have maybe twenty minutes and no resources at hand. Saturday. J
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Jan 3, 2002
                                    View Source
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      You will have to excuse for not replying just yet. I have maybe
                                      twenty minutes and no resources at hand. Saturday.

                                      J
                                    • teitan111
                                      Finally able to get to this. ... reason ... The Oaths of the G. .D. . being the outer manifestation of the Order. It is very clearly delineated that one must
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Jan 5, 2002
                                      View Source
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Finally able to get to this.

                                        > >>> The A.'.A.'. is an organization whose membership for some
                                        reason
                                        > >>> believes that they must keep such a secret, which is in direct
                                        > >>> violation of the letters of their Oaths.
                                        >
                                        > > ...the A.'.A.'. I refer to is the one AC generated in the early
                                        > > part of the last century whose Oaths very clearly delineate that
                                        > > one is to OPENLY proclaim their membership and discuss the
                                        > > A.'.A.'. and it's principles to all they meet.
                                        >
                                        > could you specifically identify where this clear delineation is to
                                        > be found (i.e. in which oaths, perhaps with a quote of it/them)?

                                        The Oaths of the G.'.D.'. being the outer manifestation of the Order.
                                        It is very clearly delineated that one must openly proclaim one's
                                        membership and discuss the A.'.A.'. and t's principles to everyone
                                        one meets.

                                        > > ...my critique can be
                                        > > taken as a view of the material manifestation and it's myriad
                                        > > offshoots today. In my examinations of various claimants all
                                        > > scream "We are the only A.'.A.'.".
                                        >
                                        > this is an incredibly valuable point, though I have myself met
                                        > with individuals (one of whom I interviewed and have made this
                                        > interview known to the public) whose participation both within
                                        > the AC/GCJ A.'.A.'. and the more expansive GWB did not support,
                                        > in his mind, the justification for such an exclusivist claim.

                                        > HOWEVER, with that said, he also wished to remain anonymous, and
                                        > I do not remember a single member of the A.'.A.'. of AC/GCJ social
                                        > lineages who wished to profess this membership to the world. I am
                                        > very intrigued by the point you are raising and would like to be
                                        > pointed to the oath(s) in question.

                                        Specifically, the O=O oath as published in various resources like the
                                        Equinox vol. IV no. 1. Also in a letter to Euclydes Lacerda de
                                        ALmeida Motta references it as part of the Probationer's Oath, but
                                        strangely tells him he i no longer bound to that Oath as a Neophyte.
                                        Now every copy of the 1=10 Oath I have access to, including the
                                        Mottic versions still has the openly proclaim clause.

                                        > > ...Links into the
                                        > > chain of universal brotherhood can be forged by anyone,
                                        >
                                        > this far I follow you and agree, though for the adept of the GWB,
                                        > I'd suggest that a brief exposure to and interview with an
                                        > individual would probably give them insight into actual linkage.
                                        > inasmuch as knowledge of another's station is impossible to obtain
                                        > with certainty, we are agreed.

                                        Yes but Ego can certainly get in the way and the arrogance of the
                                        aspirant can declare the person no member of the GWB.

                                        > > and the
                                        > > different schools of magick etc can assist in providing the
                                        necessary
                                        > > links,
                                        > > and a balanced student learns to use all three schools in his
                                        > > exploration of the universal brotherhood.
                                        >
                                        > I'd need elaboration to understand you here. are you referring here
                                        > to Crowley's "Three Schools" which he hues (if memory serves) in
                                        > "Magick Without Tears", the 'White', 'Black', and 'Yellow'? if so,
                                        > why do you find value in this schema? how do you map the group(s)
                                        > of which we are speaking into this tripartite categorization? if
                                        > not, could you broaden my understanding of your expression?

                                        To be balanced on must understand what one is balanced against. If I
                                        lean against a wall and it is made of rice paper will I not fall
                                        through? An imperfect understanding of other religions results in
                                        unbalanced and oft times hostile reactions to them. Same goes for
                                        different magickal practices, eventually these taboos must be broken
                                        down and experienced.
                                        >
                                        > > Thelema breaks down at
                                        > > certain levels and can no longer be viewed as a good model of the
                                        > > universe and driving processes of social and moral interaction.
                                        >
                                        > I'm unsure to what you are referring when you say "Thelema" in that
                                        > it may break down. how is Thelema (presumably something theoretical
                                        > and perhaps social?) a 'model' at all? where does its modelling
                                        > find value as you have suggested? what I'm getting at here is that
                                        > I'm not sure that there is any truly coherent "Thelema" model to
                                        > which we may turn, as compared to a scrap heap of expostulations in
                                        > the wake of "The Master Therion" which are at times self-contra-
                                        > dictory and philosophically fallacious or incomplete. it is quite
                                        > possible that you were making this exact point and I missed it.
                                        > sorry if this is the case.

                                        By Thelema I reference to the Book of the Law.

                                        > all the same, since you wish to speak of "Thelema" in this way, is
                                        > there something you could say about the exact substance and limit
                                        > of this model, more than merely criticizing its inferior qualities?

                                        Certainly, it saved my life. =)

                                        > i.e. how would you compare it, for example, to notions espoused by
                                        > Schopenhauer or Fichte, to whom Crowley enjoys referring the
                                        student,
                                        > or to other models which you feel are somehow better constructed?

                                        Most of my philosophical exposure has been occult religion and not
                                        standard philosophy taught in colleges etc. WHen comparing it to
                                        occult religions though, Thelema is a little less white light and
                                        good vibes. Thelema demands a more balanced approach to the
                                        exploration of consciousness. But like all models Thelema gets broken
                                        down at the AByss and has no meaning.

                                        > > Interrelation between various people of various religious
                                        standings
                                        > > requires the model of the ROsicrucians.
                                        >
                                        > could you say more about this, why there is such a requirement, and
                                        > to what model (perhaps along the lines of Manly P. Hall and his
                                        > "Secret Teachings of All Ages" or Case's "The True and Invisible
                                        > Rosicrucian Order"?) you are referring?

                                        I am speaking in reference to the original Rosicrucian documents of
                                        the 16th and 17th centuries, the documents that started it all. I am
                                        also referencing the teachings given to me by my past mentors.

                                        > >>> The work of the A.'.A.'. is based on the the concept of
                                        Scientific
                                        > >>> Illuminism and that "Mystery is the Enemy of Truth".
                                        > >>
                                        > >> I was unaware of this principle or concept. my impression is
                                        that
                                        > >> mystery is an important part of mystical life, and that its
                                        > >> dimensions conforms rather negatively to the control which the
                                        > >> aspirant may wish to level upon the world at large.
                                        > >
                                        > > Have you read the Oaths of Uncle Al?
                                        >
                                        > probably not sufficiently to understand your point, though I am
                                        > quite interested and will peruse my "Gems From the Equinox" at
                                        > some point after my return home in order to discern your meaning.
                                        > anything you could say about this in the mean time would facilitate
                                        > my following your criticism and, perhaps, taking it up myself. ;>

                                        I seem to be at a loss for words to explain something I understand on
                                        so many deep levels but at the same time can not formulate into a
                                        conscious thought.

                                        > >> mystery is a spice for the mystic, and Scientific Illuminism,
                                        > >> as practiced by the bulk of humans, is truly neither scientific
                                        > >> nor illuminating -- in fact it too often becomes religious and
                                        > >> dogmatic.

                                        > >> some apparently favour Hermetic pseudo-Jewish numerolinguistics
                                        and
                                        > >> some Lurianic ideas about the cosmos, but at best this is a
                                        subset
                                        > >> of the AA as a whole (as the GWB, which Crowley indicated he was
                                        > >> describing in the publication "One Star in Sight").
                                        > >
                                        > > He was describing a development that occured under him as the GWB
                                        > > defies any attempt to place a logical progression on it in the
                                        sense
                                        > > that AC appoints through the Sepherotic grading systems.
                                        >
                                        > agreed.
                                        >
                                        > > As per Liber
                                        > > AL there are but three grades and they do not appear to be grades
                                        at
                                        > > all but mayhaps better defined as approaches to attainment,
                                        > > approaches that each student must master in all levels before
                                        thought
                                        > > of the GWB should even enter his head. Hmmm.
                                        >
                                        > could you say more about why you value this 3-grade system?
                                        > I understand it to be at least masonic ('the Three Degrees of
                                        > (conventional) Masonry'), but I'm curious as to why you might
                                        > think it, especially as specified in the Evul Book (Crowley's
                                        > scripture: Man of Earth, Lover, Hermit), ought to be considered
                                        > a facet of the levels of attainment in some universal sense
                                        > (for all species? just humans? for all time? etc.).
                                        >
                                        > with the above clarifications we've arranged in mind....

                                        I don't think of them in that sense, not as progressive aspects of
                                        consciousness, but as approaches to the Great Work, when these three
                                        methods are properly balanced the aspirant can begin to entertain
                                        thoughts of the GWB, but not before.

                                        > >>> Call it A.D.D. or what you will, I
                                        > >>> call it the curse of the human race in this modern age,
                                        LAZINESS.
                                        >
                                        > I know we've agreed regarding the heart of the problem about a lack
                                        > of preparatory study (leading to all manner of ridiculous assumption
                                        > and claims, hyperactivity, etc.), but I'd also like to propose a
                                        > more *excusable* deficit in the Rosicrucian edifices Thelemic and
                                        > their failures to produce either evidence of attainment or indeed
                                        > to achieve the states described beyond rudimentary levels (Neophyte
                                        > and Zelator, etc.). it is a deficit which I simultaneously loathe,
                                        > because of its exclusivist and elitist complications, and yet to
                                        > which I am drawn because of the convincing lessons afforded to me
                                        > by my tantrikan guru and help-meet, sri catyananda (specifically
                                        > pertaining to matters inherited and biological, which have become
                                        > a lifetime study on her part).

                                        > I'd contend that we should probably consider the CAPACITY of the
                                        > aspirant with respect to both mysticism *and* to the application of
                                        > will. I don't mean here to indicate that what we have mentioned is
                                        > of necessity simply a problem of 'stick-to-it-iveness' or avoiding
                                        > laziness in 'covering the basics' (Crowley's focus on 'a classic
                                        > education' notwithstanding, since much of his suggestion is purely
                                        > intellectual and literary in character).
                                        >
                                        > another way of saying this is that certain individuals simply do or
                                        > do not have the APTITUDE for magic or more specifically for Magick
                                        > in the popular Crowleyan sense. it would be no more a fault of
                                        > myopia or inattention in general that a musician, athlete, or
                                        artist,
                                        > (to use examples of which the Beast was himself fond) was incapable
                                        > of developing hir skill in these areas beyond an apparent inborn or
                                        > potential aptitude. it would not be fair to say that an aspirant to
                                        > the deftness or adroitness of a master in any of these areas whose
                                        > practice and education were top rate and yet whose performance was
                                        > not to the calibre of said masters was somehow an inferior student.

                                        I would have to agree with you.

                                        <snip>

                                        > if considering the expansive application of the model of the
                                        > Magical Link described semi-lucidly by Crowley in his "Magick in
                                        > Theory and Practice" (Book Four, Part Three, especially
                                        > Chapter XIV), it is insufficient merely to be a student ('a nose
                                        > capable of being blown') with a system or method of magic/k or
                                        > mysticism ('some mechanism by which this nose may be blown,
                                        > complete with the force necessary to see it through).

                                        I would suggest suplementing this with Motta's own commentary which
                                        greatly clarifies the subject. Strangely enough Bersson provides some
                                        decent commentary on this as well in his trilogy of Terror, Gold
                                        COins, Precious Jewels and Sparkling Diamonds.

                                        it must also
                                        > be one's TRUE WILL to be so successful (i.e. 'it is my Will that
                                        > the nose is to be blown') and no amount of effort and study will
                                        > avail more than a modest effect to those not so well-placed in the
                                        > cosmic circumstance.

                                        LOL, I am incapable of blowing my nose in the traditional sense so I
                                        understand yer point perfectly.

                                        > thus we may be critical of the 'laziness' of modern students of
                                        > magic/k and mysticism, and yet it seems quite unfair to me to
                                        > generalize on the whole, because there are certainly a goodly
                                        > number of sincere students who really have applied ourselves,
                                        > and some of us may well simply lack the aptitude or capacity
                                        > (one might consider it volitional strength and compare it with
                                        > bodily structure and potential for various recreational or
                                        > artistic feats) to approach the quality of past masters in
                                        > whose glamour we choose to bask.

                                        Ok, how about this, there is a decided laziness in the character of
                                        the people who claim to Mastery within the Thelemic community, a
                                        tendency to heckle and make large statements about how they, and not
                                        (as an example in recent memory) Martin Starr have done the work
                                        necessary to claim the grade of =3. Now to my knowledge Martin hasn't
                                        claim 8=3. LOL He certainly isn't lazy.
                                        >
                                        > >>> ...those who do possess the discipline to step beyond these
                                        > >>> bounds often stop th necessary Yoga work required by the
                                        > >>> A.'.A.'. after passing the initial test and fail to
                                        > >>> accomplish any work of note.
                                        >
                                        > again, it may be that the yoga is simply inaccessible or
                                        > avails one naught.
                                        >
                                        > >>> A disciplined body is a disciplined mind. I also apply this
                                        same
                                        > >>> criticism to myself.
                                        >
                                        > and yet is discipline all that is necessary? the above hypothesis
                                        > calls into question the legitimacy of your criticisms, as well as
                                        > many of my own in this and previous threads.

                                        Discipline is but the first step. If you can not sit still and
                                        adequately visualize a bunny rabbit jumping around on the floor how
                                        can you visualize the Archangels watching over you?

                                        > >> ...bodily disciplines work on muscles, mental disciplines
                                        > >> work on synapses, mystical disciplines work on the spirit.
                                        > >
                                        > > Agreed.
                                        >
                                        > in turn, not everyone can be a superior javelin-thrower, marathon
                                        > runner, chess player, sculptor, or whirling dervish. and more
                                        > importantly for our consideration, it may well be that NO amount
                                        > of work may be sufficient to refine the dedicated student to the
                                        > Art should one be insufficiently endowed from the beginning.
                                        >
                                        > if this is true, then the CHARACTER, the raw material from which
                                        > such refinement proceeds, should be the observation and study of
                                        > those who wish to establish systems that 'make magicians', for
                                        > only in applying the proper force to the proper OBJECT in the
                                        > proper way is magic/k likely to be successful, even if that magicK
                                        > is to make of oneself a magician, Magus, etc.
                                        >
                                        > >>> There are many masters and no pupils in the realm
                                        > >>> of A.'.A.'. claims and it is borderline insanity.
                                        >
                                        > > ...in the sense of the Thelemic community and the
                                        > > prevalent social attitudes towards the A.'.A.'. as in
                                        > > the personality cult of AC.
                                        >
                                        > thank you for your contextualizing of this comment. could
                                        > you provide some reflections of these attitudes with a few
                                        > quotes from popular A.'.A.'. sources as examples?

                                        Not off the top of my head, but see the works of Bersson and
                                        other "cult" leaders within the Thelemic community.

                                        > >>> ...There seems to be a lack of any groundwork in many of
                                        > >>> the socalled "Master of the temple" wannabes.
                                        >
                                        > > I knew a few of these claimants I am criticizing and lived
                                        > > with one remember?
                                        >
                                        > the more of which you can remind me and to which you might point
                                        > in your criticism (specifically by NAME and with direct quotes),
                                        > the better able we'll be to drive this point home and discuss it
                                        > in some more depth than what may otherwise appear to be sniping.

                                        Let's see, David Bersson, early 98, private letter, paraphrase: "As
                                        long as you continue to study concepts like Voudou and Chaos Magick
                                        you will not be given initiation at this time. You must study the
                                        principles of the A.'.A.'. as laid out by Crowley." I don't have the
                                        letter on hand so I can not be direct out of it. I also reference the
                                        emphasis on being the "true" OTO argument that plagues these lists. I
                                        can only think of one manifestation that does not bleat out their
                                        being the ONLY OTO. Just looking at all the participants shows it
                                        ain't so.

                                        > > Actually, I was only exposed to SOTO and Bersson's trad of the
                                        > > A.'.A.'. for two years. WHen I found the internet I saw the
                                        reality
                                        > > of it. My usual arguements about A.'.A.'. do deal specifically
                                        with
                                        > > the social (miscalled) manifestation of the order as opposed to
                                        GWB.
                                        >
                                        > fabulous, then our efforts are allied. I think we can forge greater
                                        > headway into AA-study in our exposure of social failure and fallacy.

                                        Yes.

                                        > >>> So in Thelema we live on a "don't ask, don't tell" policy
                                        > >>> because if you tell the truth you will be ridiculed and if
                                        > >>> you open your mouth and have no idea what you are talking
                                        > >>> about you will be ridiculed. Wow, makes a lot sense to me.
                                        >
                                        > >> ...if this is all you see, then I can certainly understand
                                        > >> your pessimism. ...what is described about the AA (and
                                        > >> especially the Celestial Masters, Secret Chiefs, et al) which
                                        > >> TRANSCENDS THE PHYSICAL PLANE. there are elements of
                                        > >> instruction which can allow the interested to bypass all
                                        > >> human fallability and ego (other than one's own) for the
                                        > >> purposes of interacting with the Masters directly (no middle-
                                        > >> persons!).
                                        > >
                                        > > I have actually begun the journey on that path that you describe.
                                        >
                                        > I shall begin to presume as much since our observations and
                                        > expressions seem to be so aligned. this being an internet
                                        > channel such estimations are, of course, prone to error, but
                                        > at least we're not talking about exclusive authority and
                                        > riddling our criticisms here with the grandiose arrogance
                                        > which we are ourselves criticizing -- hypocrisy and myopia
                                        > are but two weaknesses which may be highlighted profitably.

                                        LOL, yes, very true.

                                        > > Let's drop the A.'.A.'. BS, we could easily call it Alpha
                                        > > et Omega or the GWB. Hmmm.
                                        >
                                        > given that this is a forum ostensibly dedicated to "Thelema",
                                        > I think it valuable to retain the "BS name", AA, in favour of
                                        > emphasizing what *should* be found within it given its
                                        > claims to authority and spiritual inspiration, simultaneously
                                        > contrasting this with what we (and more importantly any
                                        > interested investigator and researcher) ACTUALLY find in the
                                        > culture and written expressions of those who may be said to
                                        > represent or exemplify its socially authoritative calibre.

                                        > your argument on this point has always been a valuable one,
                                        > yet I find following it to lead to too many obtuse and,
                                        > eventually, obfuscatory results, especially for newcomers to
                                        > the subject and the 'Thelemic' culture. additional suggestions
                                        > for our lexicon of choice welcomed. :>

                                        Agreed.

                                        > free love, right now!
                                        >
                                        666
                                      • 333
                                        ... what would be the best method to confirm such an initiation and exclude observer bias? how can these Neschamahs and Nepheshes be examined so as to see
                                        Message 19 of 19 , Jan 7, 2002
                                        View Source
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          333:
                                          >> ...failures to produce either evidence of attainment or indeed to
                                          >> achieve the states described beyond rudimentary levels (Neophyte
                                          >> and Zelator, etc.).

                                          Christitan:
                                          > I would argue that it is the failure to initatiate the Neophyte and
                                          > Zelator states that results in the confusion in the temple.
                                          > The real Neophyte should be endowed with a hearty portion of
                                          > Neschamah decending into the Nephesh. When this fails to happen the
                                          > Lower Will dominates.

                                          what would be the best method to confirm such an initiation and exclude
                                          observer bias? how can these "Neschamahs" and "Nepheshes" be examined
                                          so as to see if one descends into the other. given that these are non-
                                          physical souls or soul portions, why should we consider this to be more
                                          than fantasizing on the part of mystics until we've had experience of
                                          these supposed souls ourselves?

                                          > The Zelator has contact with the astral plane. The physiological
                                          > paramaters neccesary to achive this requires advanced yoga and trance
                                          > technniques.

                                          my understanding is that "the astral plane" is the 'world' of
                                          imagination, and that no advanced yoga is necessary to effectively
                                          engage what many of us have achieved as children, though applied
                                          within a ritual and ceremonial context. trance is probably involved,
                                          agreed. you speak here as if "the astral plane" were some kind of
                                          common dimension of interaction (comparable, for example, to cyberspace).

                                          > The brain chemistry must be altered and then equilbriated.

                                          this sounds like fancy hand-waving.

                                          > The equlibiration of altered states in the four worlds
                                          > would prevent much of the hysteria in the outer courts.

                                          how would you determine where it had and hadn't occured in any
                                          world aside from appointing an "equilibration assessor" and
                                          relying on their (possibly deceptive) abilities to determine
                                          the initiation of the individual considered?

                                          what you're saying may be valuable, but I don't see how it can be
                                          taken into the real world and applied. please advise.

                                          333
                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.